[tor-talk] darkweb-everywhere - was: Using HTTPS Everywhere to redirect to .onion

[Paul Syverson]

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:00:49PM -0300, J.M. Porup wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014, at 11:53, Patrick Schleizer wrote:
> > Nicolas Vigier:
> > > It's a little sad that so many people like to use the word "DarkWeb"
> > > to talk about .onion websites, because it sounds like something scary
> > > or bad.
> > 
> > Agreed. The word "dark" is already a negatively perceived word. And
> > DarkWeb also has become a negatively perceived term.
> > 
> > Let's find a positive term to talk about .onion websites! Any ideas?
> 
> I think the likelihood of repositioning the "Dark Web" brand in
> people's minds is approximately zero.

The point isn't about the "Dark Web" brand. It is about the .onion
brand.  I know what a .onion address and a .onion site is.  I honestly
have no idea what you mean by "Dark Web" here since I have seen it
used in so many incompatible and confused ways that it cannot be used
to communicate anything coherently unless the speaker takes additional
effort each time to spell out what they mean. In other words, this is
not a useful term for talking to people who understand the techonology
and is a dangerously misleading term for talking to people who don't.

There may be a better phrase. It might be, but probably isn't "Deep
Web", which has a more coherent origin, but is already transitioning
in an even muddier way than how "hacker" has evolved. I don't think
common usage, e.g., in the popular media, makes any distinction
between "Dark Web" and "Deep Web". This entire thread is indeed
something of an illustration of that and I assume was the original
point of the frustration expressed.

> 
> I would recommend finding a way to turn the negative into a positive.
> Embrace the negative with a joke, for instance:
> 
> Use the Dark Web. "Go Over to the Dark Side."

They have cookies.

aloha,
Paul